Literature DB >> 30064455

Intra-articular injection of two different doses of autologous bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells versus hyaluronic acid in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: long-term follow up of a multicenter randomized controlled clinical trial (phase I/II).

José María Lamo-Espinosa1,2, Gonzalo Mora1, Juan F Blanco3, Froilán Granero-Moltó1,2, Jorge María Núñez-Córdoba4,5,6, Silvia López-Elío1, Enrique Andreu2, Fermín Sánchez-Guijo7, José Dámaso Aquerreta8, José María Bondía8, Andrés Valentí-Azcárate1, María Del Consuelo Del Cañizo7, Eva María Villarón7, Juan Ramón Valentí-Nin1, Felipe Prósper9,10.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) are a promising option to treat knee osteoarthritis (OA). Their safety and usefulness have been reported in several short-term clinical trials but less information is available on the long-term effects of MSC in patients with osteoarthritis. We have evaluated patients included in our previous randomized clinical trial (CMM-ART, NCT02123368) to determine their long-term clinical effect. MATERIALS: A phase I/II multicenter randomized clinical trial with active control was conducted between 2012 and 2014. Thirty patients diagnosed with knee OA were randomly assigned to Control group, intraarticularly administered hyaluronic acid alone, or to two treatment groups, hyaluronic acid together with 10 × 106 or 100 × 106 cultured autologous bone marrow-derived MSCs (BM-MSCs), and followed up for 12 months. After a follow up of 4 years adverse effects and clinical evolution, assessed using VAS and WOMAC scorings are reported.
RESULTS: No adverse effects were reported after BM-MSCs administration or during the follow-up. BM-MSCs-administered patients improved according to VAS, median value (IQR) for Control, Low-dose and High-dose groups changed from 5 (3, 7), 7 (5, 8) and 6 (4, 8) to 7 (6, 7), 2 (2, 5) and 3 (3, 4), respectively at the end of follow up (Low-dose vs Control group, p = 0.01; High-dose vs Control group, p = 0.004). Patients receiving BM-MSCs also improved clinically according to WOMAC. Control group showed an increase median value of 4 points (- 11;10) while Low-dose and High-dose groups exhibited values of - 18 (- 28;- 9) and - 10 (- 21;- 3) points, respectively (Low-dose vs Control group p = 0.043). No clinical differences between the BM-MSCs receiving groups were found.
CONCLUSIONS: Single intraarticular injection of in vitro expanded autologous BM-MSCs is a safe and feasible procedure that results in long-term clinical and functional improvement of knee OA.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Intraarticular injection; Knee osteoarthritis; Mesenchymal stem cells

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30064455      PMCID: PMC6069715          DOI: 10.1186/s12967-018-1591-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Transl Med        ISSN: 1479-5876            Impact factor:   5.531


Background

Osteoarthritis is a chronic disease involving the progressive degeneration of the articular cartilage and subchondral bone, accompanied by synovitis [1]. Current treatment options for articular cartilage injury and osteoarthritis are aimed to relieve inflammation and pain, but have no effect on the natural progression of the disease [2]. Mesenchymal stromal cells are a promising option to treat knee osteoarthritis (OA) where, to date, knee arthroplasty is the only therapeutic option [3]. In the short term, the safety and usefulness of single injection of expanded autologous MSCs have been reported with positive results [4-6]. However, long-term results on the efficacy of MSCs in patients with osteoarthritis have been scarcely reported. Reservations about the time and extent of the anti-inflammatory effects of MSCs are present, questioning the real value of these therapies in the medium and long term. Here, we present the long-term results of a prospective randomized clinical trial (No EudraCT: 2009-017624-72, Clinical Trials. gov identifier: NCT02123368) of patients with knee osteoarthritis previously reported [4]. The occurrence of complications and/or adverse effects during the clinical study was registered. The knee OA treatments received during these time were recorded. In addition, the response to the intra-articular infusion of HA with or without BM-MSCs was assessed using VAS and WOMAC scores in the patients whom did not underwent total knee arthroplasty. Because the mild effect reported in MRI studies during the initial follow-up, 12 months, and because the absence of femorotibial joint space in 50% of the patients, 0 mm at baseline (IV Kellgren-Lawrence grade), imaging studies were not prolonged.

Demographic data

We were able to contact 27 of the 30 patients included in the clinical trial and them have been included in the follow up (Fig. 1). Two of the patients of the Control group and one patient of the Low-dose group received a total knee arthroplasty. Nonetheless, one of these patients of the Control group was included in the clinical analysis because the surgical treatment was performed after the data collection. In addition, two patients of the Control group underwent infiltration treatment with platelet rich plasma in the knee included in the clinical trial. In spite of these, we have finally included 25 patients (9, 8 and 8 patients in Control, Low-dose and High-dose group, respectively) for the clinical analysis (Fig. 1). All the groups showed similar baseline characteristics of age and body mass index. Patients in the three groups showed an uneven distribution according to the Kellgren-Lawrence scale but without statistical significance (p = 0.585, Table 1). The follow up was 48 months (4 years).
Fig. 1

Study flow diagram. We have included 27 patients of the 30 patients that participate in the clinical trial

Table 1

Demographic data

ControlBM-MSCs
Low-doseHigh-dose
N988
Age (years)60.6 (58.9, 61.1)65.9 (58.3, 69.5)57.8 (54.4, 63.0)
Males, n (%)7 (77.8)4 (50)6 (75)
BMI (kg/m2)29.4 (26.2, 30.8)26.6 (23.6, 32)28.6 (24.9, 31.8)
K-L* 2, n (%)4 (44.4)1 (12.5)2 (25)
K-L* 3, n (%)2 (22.2)2 (25)3 (37.5)
K-L* 4, n (%)3 (33.3)5 (62.5)4 (37.5)

Data are presented as median [interquartile range (IQR)]. OA osteoarthritis *K-L: Kellgren and Lawrence grading scale of severity of knee osteoarthritis at the beginning of the clinical trial

Study flow diagram. We have included 27 patients of the 30 patients that participate in the clinical trial Demographic data Data are presented as median [interquartile range (IQR)]. OA osteoarthritis *K-L: Kellgren and Lawrence grading scale of severity of knee osteoarthritis at the beginning of the clinical trial

Safety

No serious adverse events or complications derived from the procedures or treatments were noted during the follow up. The patients who required anti-inflammatory treatment during the first 24 h after infiltration did not evolve with greater pain at the end of follow up.

Clinical assessment of pain and function

VAS and WOMAC clinical scores were used in order to obtain the best picture of how patients perceived their own evolution at 4 years. The VAS scale showed a progressive improvement during the follow up in the groups treated with BM-MSCs (Fig. 2) while the control group, patients showed a progressive deterioration, increasing in two points the median at the end of the follow up. Median VAS values (IQR) for Control, Low-dose and High-dose groups changed from 5 (3, 7), 7 (5, 8) and 6 (4, 8) to 7 (6, 7), 2 (2, 5) and 3 (3, 4), respectively at the end of follow up (Low-dose vs Control group, p = 0.01; High-dose vs Control group, p = 0.004).
Fig. 2

VAS scores along the study. The median values of VAS in the three groups before administration of treatments and 3, 6, 12 months and 4 years afterwards are presented. At 4 years: Low-dose vs Control group, p = 0.01 and High-dose vs Control group, p = 0.004

VAS scores along the study. The median values of VAS in the three groups before administration of treatments and 3, 6, 12 months and 4 years afterwards are presented. At 4 years: Low-dose vs Control group, p = 0.01 and High-dose vs Control group, p = 0.004 Similarly, the results of the WOMAC score showed an improvement at the end of the follow up in both groups treated with BM-MSCs. Median WOMAC values (IQR) for Control, Low-dose and High-dose groups changed from 27 (19, 32), 37 (30, 46) and 29 (22, 35.5) to 27 (17, 30), 17 (13, 25.5) and 16.5 (8, 23), respectively at the end of follow up (Low-dose vs Control group, p = 0.04). Furthermore, although patients receiving only HA initially perceived some improvement for pain and physical function subscores, this perception was not sustained after long-term follow up. Intraarticular delivery of BM-MSCs, especially when used at low dose, enabled patients to perceive an improvement in their perception of pain in their daily activity (Fig. 3).
Fig. 3

WOMAC scores along the study. The median values of WOMAC in the three groups before administration of treatments and 3, 6, 12 months and 4 years afterwards are presented. At 4 years: Low-dose vs Control group, p = 0.01 and High-dose vs Control group, ns

WOMAC scores along the study. The median values of WOMAC in the three groups before administration of treatments and 3, 6, 12 months and 4 years afterwards are presented. At 4 years: Low-dose vs Control group, p = 0.01 and High-dose vs Control group, ns A statistically significant improvement in WOMAC value (calculated as the value at baseline versus end of follow up) was observed in patients receiving BM-MSCs, but not in the group treated with HA alone [4 (− 11, 10), − 18 (− 27.5, 8.5), and − 10 (− 21.5, − 3), median (IQR), for Control, Low-dose and High-dose BM-MSCs groups, respectively]. Thus, only the patients who had been treated with BM-MSCs met criteria to be considered WOMAC responders after 4 years of follow up [7].

Conclusions

Our study shows that the single intraarticular injection of in vitro expanded autologous BM-MSCs together with HA is a safe and feasible procedure that results in a clinical and functional improvement of knee OA after a follow up of 4 years. There are some questions that would need further analysis, especially if a high dose of cells is needed and if the repeated intraaticular injection of BM-MSC may increase clinical results. In any case these results support the development of future phase III clinical trial.
  7 in total

Review 1.  Osteoarthritis.

Authors:  L S Simon
Journal:  Curr Rheumatol Rep       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 4.592

2.  Treatment of knee osteoarthritis with autologous mesenchymal stem cells: two-year follow-up results.

Authors:  Lluis Orozco; Anna Munar; Robert Soler; Mercedes Alberca; Francesc Soler; Marina Huguet; Joan Sentís; Ana Sánchez; Javier García-Sancho
Journal:  Transplantation       Date:  2014-06-15       Impact factor: 4.939

3.  Patient acceptable symptom state and OMERACT-OARSI set of responder criteria in joint replacement. Identification of cut-off values.

Authors:  A Escobar; M Gonzalez; J M Quintana; K Vrotsou; A Bilbao; C Herrera-Espiñeira; L Garcia-Perez; F Aizpuru; C Sarasqueta
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2011-11-20       Impact factor: 6.576

Review 4.  Mechanism of cartilage destruction in osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Naoki Ishiguro; Toshihisa Kojima; A Robin Poole
Journal:  Nagoya J Med Sci       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 1.131

Review 5.  The impact of osteoarthritis: implications for research.

Authors:  Joseph A Buckwalter; Charles Saltzman; Thomas Brown
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Intra-articular injection of two different doses of autologous bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells versus hyaluronic acid in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: multicenter randomized controlled clinical trial (phase I/II).

Authors:  José M Lamo-Espinosa; Gonzalo Mora; Juan F Blanco; Froilán Granero-Moltó; Jorge M Nuñez-Córdoba; Carmen Sánchez-Echenique; José M Bondía; Jesús Dámaso Aquerreta; Enrique J Andreu; Enrique Ornilla; Eva M Villarón; Andrés Valentí-Azcárate; Fermín Sánchez-Guijo; María Consuelo Del Cañizo; Juan Ramón Valentí-Nin; Felipe Prósper
Journal:  J Transl Med       Date:  2016-08-26       Impact factor: 5.531

7.  Avoidance of Total Knee Arthroplasty in Early Osteoarthritis of the Knee with Intra-Articular Implantation of Autologous Activated Peripheral Blood Stem Cells versus Hyaluronic Acid: A Randomized Controlled Trial with Differential Effects of Growth Factor Addition.

Authors:  Thana Turajane; Ukrit Chaveewanakorn; Warachaya Fongsarun; Jongjate Aojanepong; Konstantinos I Papadopoulos
Journal:  Stem Cells Int       Date:  2017-09-19       Impact factor: 5.443

  7 in total
  27 in total

Review 1.  Role and Effectiveness of Intra-articular Injection of Hyaluronic Acid in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Sumant Chavda; Syed Arman Rabbani; Tarun Wadhwa
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2022-04-26

2.  Efficacy and Safety of Intra-Articular Cell-Based Therapy for Osteoarthritis: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Wei Ding; Yong-Qing Xu; Ying Zhang; An-Xu Li; Xiong Qiu; Hong-Jie Wen; Hong-Bo Tan
Journal:  Cartilage       Date:  2020-07-22       Impact factor: 3.117

Review 3.  Clinical Applicability of Adult Human Mesenchymal Stem Cell Therapy in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Noor Buzaboon; Sfoug Alshammary
Journal:  Stem Cells Cloning       Date:  2020-12-17

4.  Comparative matched-pair cohort analysis of the short-term clinical outcomes of mesenchymal stem cells versus hyaluronic acid treatments through intra-articular injections for knee osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Yong Sang Kim; Dong Suk Suh; Dae Hyun Tak; Pill Ku Chung; Yoo Beom Kwon; Tae Yong Kim; Yong Gon Koh
Journal:  J Exp Orthop       Date:  2020-11-13

5.  The Exposure to Osteoarthritic Synovial Fluid Enhances the Immunomodulatory Profile of Adipose Mesenchymal Stem Cell Secretome.

Authors:  Adriana Cifù; Rossana Domenis; Massimo Pozzi-Mucelli; Paolo Di Benedetto; Araldo Causero; Massimo Moretti; Marta Stevanato; Cinzia Pistis; Pier Camillo Parodi; Martina Fabris; Francesco Curcio
Journal:  Stem Cells Int       Date:  2020-07-18       Impact factor: 5.443

Review 6.  Mesenchymal Stromal Cells and Exosomes: Progress and Challenges.

Authors:  Matthew H Forsberg; John A Kink; Peiman Hematti; Christian M Capitini
Journal:  Front Cell Dev Biol       Date:  2020-07-17

Review 7.  Mesenchymal stem cell-derived exosomes: a new therapeutic approach to osteoarthritis?

Authors:  Elaheh Mianehsaz; Hamid Reza Mirzaei; Maryam Mahjoubin-Tehran; Alireza Rezaee; Roxana Sahebnasagh; Mohammad Hossein Pourhanifeh; Hamed Mirzaei; Michael R Hamblin
Journal:  Stem Cell Res Ther       Date:  2019-11-21       Impact factor: 6.832

Review 8.  The use of large animals to facilitate the process of MSC going from laboratory to patient-'bench to bedside'.

Authors:  W E Hotham; F M D Henson
Journal:  Cell Biol Toxicol       Date:  2020-03-23       Impact factor: 6.691

9.  Combining canine mesenchymal stromal cells and hyaluronic acid for cartilage repair.

Authors:  Maria Inês Wits; Gabriela Cabanas Tobin; Maiele Dornelles Silveira; Karine Gehlen Baja; Luisa Maria Macedo Braga; Patricia Sesterheim; Melissa Camassola; Nance Beyer Nardi
Journal:  Genet Mol Biol       Date:  2020-03-02       Impact factor: 1.771

Review 10.  Articular Cartilage Regeneration in Osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Livia Roseti; Giovanna Desando; Carola Cavallo; Mauro Petretta; Brunella Grigolo
Journal:  Cells       Date:  2019-10-23       Impact factor: 6.600

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.